Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Spy With A View

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Daniel (talk) 10:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Spy With A View

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sign of notability. Supposed review is a user comment. Supposed "Best Scene" award is being lumped in with a bunch of Bronze-level (not Gold, not Silver, which were both awarded), and the award-giving group (Association of American Schools in Central America) is of dubious significance in the realm of drama. Nat Gertler (talk) 20:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear that this show has received many productions across the world. Whether bronze, gold or silver it is still an award. The review may have been a user comment but surely it is still a review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickyshe (talk • contribs) 21:02, 31 January 2015‎ (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no, it's not clear that this has "received many productions around the world", we do not have a reliable source indicating that. As for being still an award, it looks like EVERYTHING at the festival gets an award ("Medals for overall ratings will be awarded to all participants who meet the criteria") --Nat Gertler (talk) 04:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:39, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:39, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The play is already listed on the playwright's Wikipedia page. The "award" is from the Association of American Schools of Central America, which is hardly big in theater circles. There are no significant third-party sources in the references, and I didn't turn up any. LaMona (talk) 00:13, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.